Pros And Cons of School Uniforms in Australia

My interest in uniform policy and its implementation in educational institutions was ignited in 2018, as the independent Catholic girls' college, I attended during my high school years, came under scrutiny for abandoning its traditional tartan kilt, and introducing a cooperate-inspired suit, with long trousers, blazer and white shirt. The school's principal argued the overhaul would not only reflect the schools' progressive nature but also allow students to 'feel comfortable expressing their femininity and masculinity' (Jones, 2018). This justification was negatively received by conservative Christians and media figures who contended the principal was promoting 'cultural Marxism' and 'enforcing gender fluidity on female students” (Jones, 2018). Some parents, went as far as threatening to un-enrol their daughters from the school. Despite the initial controversies, the school has become one of three non-government schools across Sydney to offer pants and shorts to female students. In light of this disputation, this essay will serve as a platform for the exploration of the pros and cons of school uniforms for students and the wider school community.

Background

According to the NSW Department of Education School Uniform Policy (2018) schools must set local school uniforms which promote a sense of belonging, create a positive identity for the school community and take into account the diverse natures of the school's student population. It also contends uniforms must allow students to access the full range of school activities, including those of a physical nature and the provision pants and shorts for female students. However, this is not applicable to independent and private school which have jurisdiction over the writing of policies. 

The existence of school uniforms owes much of its heritage to our British colonisers. Many of the Australian school uniforms were adopted from British schools in the 19th century and characterised by blazers and shorts or pants for male students and dresses and knee-high socks for girls, matched leather shoes. Colours and prints are typically simple and unembellished, to embody preparedness and professionalism.

School Uniform: pros and cons 

Proponents of the uniform policy argue such garments promote egalitarianism amongst student bodies, by eliminating outwards evidence of social class and income disparities (Jamison, 2006). Clothing has long served, more so than any other single aspect of material culture, as the symbolic representation of group identity and economic status. With Western culture placing significant emphasis on conformity and consumption; brands, colour, style and even drapery can be perceived as an indication of social grouping, particularly amongst pre-adolescents (Jamison, 2006). Unfortunately, failure to adhere to certain conventions or trends can result in marginalisation, prejudice, dissatisfaction, and possibly the development of deeper social and emotional issues. The enforcement of school uniforms therefore, advances the expectation that all students will be dressed identically regardless of their stylistic preferences or socio-economic status. Students and their parents are relieved from the pressures of having to produce a new outfit each day or obtain the latest brands and fashions to gain acceptance or assimilate. School uniforms can also foster and strengthen a sense of school pride, unity and community spirit. The homogeneous nature of the garments are designed to increase solidarity based on physical appearance and diminish the potential fissioning effects of varied access to clothing and group identity-based style (Jamison, 2006). This can contribute to a climate of belongingness and fellowship amongst students.

In contrast, uniforms can be considered as a tool of administrative power, constraining self-expression manifested through dress. Selection of clothing is not only a demonstration of individuality, but also a means of asserting oneself with a certain sub-culture or social group. Removing this right can have detrimental effects on one’s identity and sense of self. The perpetuation of gender norms through segregated uniforms is another significant issue in schools. According to Happel (2013) uniforms which demand skirt wearing amongst female students, can mould and naturalise gendered performance. In failing to provide alternatives to dresses and skirts, the wearers moveability is restricted, meaning they must negotiate how they can sit, play and walk (Happel, 2013). Consciously and unconsciously, it regulates behaviour and imposes considerations of modesty and immodesty (Happel, 2013). Trans and non-binary students are also negatively impacted by the traditional gender norms and expectations reinforced by segregated uniforms, insinuating their identity in not valued in institutionalised settings.

Conclusion

Conclusively, it is apparent that there are pros and cons of wearing school uniforms. Proponents argue that uniforms promote egalitarianism, reduce the pressure to conform to fashion trends, and foster a sense of belonging and unity within the school community. However, critics argue that uniforms infringe upon students' rights to self-expression and can perpetuate gender norms and inequality. The restriction on individuality and personal style may have detrimental effects on students' sense of identity and self-esteem. 

It is crucial for schools and educational institutions to consider these contrasting perspectives when formulating uniform policies. Flexibility and inclusivity should be prioritized to accommodate diverse student populations and ensure that all students feel comfortable and supported. Options for alternative uniform choices, such as pants and shorts for female students, can help address gender inequality and promote inclusivity.